Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: dunno Date: Mar 3, 2005 6:43am
Forum: petabox Subject: Re: about 400TB of this design shipped to the Archive

about the "We really want a micro-atx motherboard that has gigabit, low power, 4 sata ports. alas, we can not find such a beast yet."
specifically the gigabit part.

how many nodes are you thinking of, and then how large is your LAN pipe, and how large is your WAN pipe... because you have a lot of nodes, and gigabit switches aren't cheap. what would you do with the bandwidth?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or Staffbrewster Date: Mar 3, 2005 1:06pm
Forum: petabox Subject: Re: about 400TB of this design shipped to the Archive

our wan bandwidth is 1gbit. the cost of gigabit switches are reasonable at this point, for us.

with a 1.6TB node, it takes 1.6days (roughly) to copy it, so that is a very long time. it would be nice to have that down to serveral hours.

-brewster

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jko Date: Mar 31, 2005 1:41pm
Forum: petabox Subject: Re: about 400TB of this design shipped to the Archive

Isn't that .16 days, to transfer 1.6TB, assuming you get full (un-realistic) 1 Gbps. Even at half, it's still less than 10 hrs.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: James Day Date: Apr 1, 2005 6:47pm
Forum: petabox Subject: Re: about 400TB of this design shipped to the Archive

1.6 days was probably the time at 100 megabits.

In practice, Wikipedia sees closer to 20-40 megabytes per second over local gigabit links. Probably not coincidentally, typical router traffic levels in colocation sites tend to have about a 340 megabits per second traffic limit in practical use.

Can definitely see why the Internet Archive wants a faster network connection. Gigabit switches are inexpensive compared to the costs they reduce. Notably getting things done within easy human attentions span or getting a system working again after a problem.

Trying to maintain a high traffic, high availability place can significantly change views of what is optional and what is necessary. Things like power distribution units with meters and alarms so someone is less likely to take out a whole rack or site by overloading a 30 amp circuit. You haven't lived until something avoidable like that has taken a popular site down for half a day because you didn't spend (or didn't have available to spend) $350 or so for a metered PDU and your colo wasn't watching.

Brak's earlier comment about costs was also spot on. There's a lot more to factor in than the obvious bits when you have to be reliable and need to price the whole system.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: dunno Date: Jun 11, 2005 7:45am
Forum: petabox Subject: Re: about 400TB of this design shipped to the Archive

The move from the low power eden VIA processors to the expensive, 68.5W max TDP P4 is a bit puzzling. of the chips I would expect you to look for, a MIPS based board, or a G4 (ppc6xx?), or a mobile pentium (banias/dothan), a transmeta, or a P3... you choose instead, a desktop P4, rather 40 desktop P4's per 42U rack.

now, I suppose you were locked in to a micro-ITX board because of your custom case, but I am under the impression that socket 370, and socket 479 (P3, and Banias/dothan) boards are available for that format. perhaps they were more expensive (the banias/dothan boards), or not available with gigabit (P3?).

anyway, I can't imagine it would be easy to run a P4 2.8 in a 1U rack, much less 40 in a 42 rack, and I would imagine it would drastically increase the HVAC burden, and the kW/hr.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: James Day Date: Jun 11, 2005 12:27pm
Forum: petabox Subject: Re: about 400TB of this design shipped to the Archive

I'm a Wikipedia person so I can't really comment much on that petabox CPU choice. Maybe brewster will.

On the Wikipedia side, we've recently started storying three identical copies of our old versions of article text on our P4 Apache web servers/page builders, to use their hard drives for something useful. The Petabox might have some similar processing power need or might just not have been able to get what they wanted in the available alternative options. Wikipedia hasn'yet given much thought ot kW/hr and HVAC loads, perhaps mostlybecause they are just part of the package at our current hosting place.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: viswiss Date: Jan 23, 2010 7:55am
Forum: petabox Subject: Re: about 400TB of this design shipped to the Archive


Your post is really informative for me. I liked it very much.
Keep sharing such important posts.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: indianews Date: Jan 21, 2010 7:27am
Forum: petabox Subject: Re: about 400TB of this design shipped to the Archive

your information was very helpful. Thanks